and once you get all the academia behind you, it still comes down to who are those who are less fortunate that we need to give more concern to? and that's where we are. and i'm hopeful that eventually that we can get there because they are the ones who wake up tomorrow with nothing on the table. and i yield back, mr. chairman. >> are there other amendments to title iv? well, everybody had a five-minute bite at the apple. are there other amendments? recognize mr. walsh for five minutes. >> that's why i'm going to yield to one of those smart people, mr. mcgovern. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. i'm amazed at how this markup has evolved. in the beginning, my friends on the other side were talking about how these provisions were the greatest thing since slice bread. they were wonderful and then mr. davis basically said don't pay attention to what's in the bill. you may think it's bad but this is the beginning of a process. it will change and change and maybe get better. here is a radical idea. why don't we start off with the very best product we can? rather than something that nobody k

committee that encompasses diverse representation from law enforcement, civil rights organizations, and academia. have posted a series of meetings to hear perspectives from hate crime survivors, academic experts, advocacy leaders and law enforcement officials on best practices to combat hate. the end product will be a summary report outlining the action items detailing the discussions on the advisory group and will be released between the summer and early fall of 2018. it is a very competent of documents that we will clearly make available to this committee. today i would like to focus on challenges law-enforcement faces when it comes to hate crimes. as you have heard from the last two presenters, over the years, one of the greatest barriers to confront the overcoming hate violence has been the lack of statistical data on the occurrence and nature of these crimes. participation of the reporting system, which like the rest of the ucr is voluntary. while participation has increased over the year, but dissipation levels are seriously lacking. we know that figures -- the figures, as reported to the

they must work with the private sector and academia. also important are our investments in s.t.e.m. education programs to develop talent and future tech leaders with policies that promote an environment in which global public institutions and industry can thrive. i have an opportunity to meet with dr. schmidt and i want to thank you because it provides really healthy for us and how we continue to do many of these that we have been working on but also build an architecture that's going to bring us into the future and certainly respond to the needs of the men and women who go to war on behalf of our country. i am looking forward to hearing your testimony today. thank you. yield the floor. >> without objection both of your witnesses statements will be made a part of the record. i do want to comment, dr. griffin, that nobody has read yours because we just got it and i realize that when you are an administration official it has to be cleared by all of these different levels, it's important for those involved in getting us written statements and getting them timely. again nobody has read

they must work with the private sector and academia. no less important are investments in stem education, programs that develop junior talent into future tech leaders of policies that promote an environment in which global collaboration, discovery, innovation, public institutions, and industry can thrive. i had an opportunity to read dr. schmidt's statement and i want to thank you because it provides a kind of reality test for us, and how do we continue to do many of the advances that we've been working on, and you note those in your statement very clearly. but also build an architecture that is going to bring us into the future and certainly respond to the needs of the men and women who go to war on behalf of our country. i look forward to hearing your testimony today. thank you. excuse me. and i yield back. >> without objection, both of your written statements will be made a part of the record. i do want to comment, dr. griffin, that nobody's read yours because we just got it. and i think it's important. i realize that when you're an

individual businesses, industries as a whole, academia, government, we all have a role to play in moving the needle forward. and one critical area where i see government playing a critical role is what i call a convener of conversations. and that is to bring people around the table and put the important issues and needs on the table with the right people so that we can have an open dialogue to ensure that the needs of tomorrow are being addressed by our schools and our education system so we can prepare for that workforce. and it's important in doing so that we break those silos down so that we can have good important conversations. and there is no easy fix there is sometimes communication and language differences. but it's really important to have those conversations. and to use a term that i heard this morning, that's stefani pashman used from the allegheny conference, it's the information gap. how do we ensure that we're fulfilling that information gap and making sure that those conversations exist? and i'll tell you, in the conversations that we had in new york city government, it's

we engage the private sector and academia as needed. we recognize it's going to be an all of the above type activity to answer these areas. >> that's a perfect marriage, if you will, we're able to do that. there by, do away with the stigma, the nonability to work with nonoutside groups and to make this as seamless as possible. still going to come back for one more. these research partnerships have the potential to accelerate scientific breakthroughs and health care delivery systems and bio sciences. should the department replicate this model in other field of research and what steps can we take to facilitate that? >> i think the answer is yes in terms of replication. our focal point now has been on the veterans health data and on the precision medicine data set because of its unique complexities. it comes with annotations with handwritten notes, with data streams and imagery and the collections of multi modal data that talks to a situation in unique ways that is going to test how we develop predictive technologies, artificially intellig

we engage the private sector and academia as needed. we bring in as many people as we can, because we recognize it is going to be and all of the above type of activity to answer these priority areas at the veterans administration's, as defined. >> actually, that is a perfect marriage, if you will. -- been able to do that, and thereby do away with stigma. --. do away with the -- to work with outside groups and make this a seamless as possible. i am going to come back to you with one more. these research partnerships have the potential to accelerate scientific breakers and healthcare systems and bio sciences. should the department replicate this model in other fields of research? and, what steps can we as congress take to facilitate that? >> i think the answer is yes, in terms of replication. our focal point right now has been on the veterans health data, and on the precision medicine data set, because of its unique complexities. because it comes with annotations with handwritten notes, with data streams, and imagery, and the collections

two years, we've made progress with the fbi and dhs in advice and awareness and threat to not known academia and industry from china and other nation states. we will continue to do that and work with the associations and i concur with your point that i think the private sector leadership at the ceo level needs to be more active in terms of ob staining clearances so that information that is classified can get to them in a more efficient manner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to pick up mr. evanina on the vice chairman's point with respect to zte specifically. thank you for the visit we had in our office. now in 2012, the house intelligence committee issued a nonclassified by partisan report on national security issues posed by the chinese telecom companies. one of them was zte. the report concluded that the risks associated with zte's provision of equipment to u.s. critical infrastructure could undermine american national security interests. do you agree with that bipartisan report? >> senator, i do. >> now, they recommended that the united states should view with suspicion the continued

a pleasure to see all old friends from the intelligence community, from the think tank and world of academia and other agencies around town. and even some media friends i have made over the years, so thank you for having me today. in the interest of time i'm going to cut right to the chase, and try to identify a core question. and give you my thoughts on that core question and hopefully frame the discussion that we have on the panel, but also during the q and a. so the core question i have been thinking a lot about is what exactly is putin going to do in the next six years, now that he has won reelection? does have a strategy? what does he really seek to achieve during this timeframe? i'm not even going to get into -- some of you may have seen that is the rate of chechnya. somebody might want to put in the constitution for 2024, that is a whole subject unto itself. i'm going to focus on the next six years. so if i look -- by the way, i think everybody will become a russia expert. it is impossible not to pick up a newspaper and everybody has an opinion on putin. so i'm just one of them. i spe

in the early 2000s it was very popular in academia, for obvious reasons there was an overfocus on trying to find ideologies behind the putin regime. it took ideology, i think, much too seriously in trying to understand how the kremlin worked. now there haven't in the mainstream enough interrogation of the besieged fort tress, what they mean, what the russian establishment has come to believe about certain things and how it's propagating ideologies and pumping them into institutions and network institutions from the whole secret service world, it really is a world of private schools and private hunting lodges and into the bureaucracy and into the military. i think that when we talk about russia a comment that one receives from russian officials and then media, media, media sock puppets is you're talking about fragment remains of the 1990s. they do have a point here which is that the -- certainly the discussion in the media we get is an overfocus on a generation of ambitious 1990 oligarchs heavy criminal lysed, but you have these sort of western global financial ambitions and there isn't e

things, one of the great gentlemen these two have is they have the ability to write definitive works in academia that we can all understand, and that is a rare, rare gift. one of the reasons why david and molly and don and marie and gay, we all work to create this series, the vision fork, was for this, and to promote this sense of civic education and remembrance of the founding, and by design, this is why this year's program has closed with these two individuals. on that note, a last, quick question. the state of civic education in america today and historical literacy, which piggybacks off what we just talked about, professor woods? as i say, the tail being written by the academics is tale of americanhistory, is a tale of oppression. these are stories that should be told, but not at the exclusion of the other stories. there are alternative facts, lots of facts out there. the question is, how focused should you be on all the negative facts? hoe one wants to hide the fact that the treatment of the native peoples was atrocious over the long run. although not everyone was out to eliminate them, it

are available, the education and engagement that we can have through the public and partnerships with academia, information technology, security experts and all that. that's the way we're going to guarantee the security of the 2018 election of not placing federal agents in our polling systems. >> can i ask something? dean mentioned the transparency piece of this. we have to balance the transparency and security. that can be a fine line for election administrators to walk. and we're going to see that certainly in 2018 and pull out further in 2020. i want to add not just to the election administrators but what can voters do, right? and one of the things i'd encourage folks to do is volunteer as a poll worker. i'd hate to use the tsa technology, but if you "see something, say something." those administrators can be valuable. and those monitoring the polls can be helpful. i know some of my colleagues would probably strangle me over saying that. but i think it's important for the public to be out there monitoring. >> how do people sign up? >> go to you know website. we'll sign -- our website. we'll

also, it have to do with the -- has to do with the changing labor force composition in academia. there are fewer tenured track slots. there are often 200 applicants for a single job. but, that is one of the reasons why we have put so much effort in the past five years into thinking hard about what a phd is for. what is the purpose of the history phd? is it only to become a professor? 25% of all history phd's are not professors of any kind. they are not lecturers, adjuncts, teaching at the college level. some of them are teaching high school, but a lot of those history phd's are in the private sector. or they work for the government, , the public-sector, investment banking, marketing. just about everything. so, what we are trying to do now is to help graduate programs rethink their phd program in terms of how they prepare people for a variety of careers. susan: how much hunger is there among the academy in particular to learn digital technology? and are you, in fact, helping to train people on the importance of using twitter, of having a facebook presence, blogs? james: we don't h